1A Intelligence Desk

← Back to search results

Transcript Details

COP SPIT IN MY FACE… THEN THEY PUT ME ON TRIAL?! FAHEY TRIAL DAY 1

my approach. Maybe we can. >> Yeah, sure. It's probably better. >> Objection. >> Extra commentary like I might get hurt if I approach the witness. Stop. >> Judge, I would ask you to instruct him to answer the question. >> I just answered it and I'm not on trial. >> You are on trial. >> Thank you. >> Were you arrested as a result of this incident? >> I was. I'm sorry. Did you say something? I didn't hear you. >> Oh, no. You announced something at me, Doug. You didn't. Okay. >> Hey, what's up guys? Sean Paul Ray with Long Island Audit here. Back again with another video. In today's video, we're going to be watching day one of the Feahhee trial. Excuse me. Technically, it's my trial, but we all know that Brian Fehee, the unhinged savage animal, should be the one on trial. But unfortunately, I am. Today is day one. It is extremely interesting. Make sure you guys hit the like button and share this video to expose this injustice to the world. Big shout out to Stephen and TA from the Real News Network as they were able to get permission to record the proceedings. So, I appreciate them for promoting transparency in this case. Make sure you're subscribed and have notifications turned on so you don't miss day two of the trial, which is the conclusion of the trial. Make sure you watch to the end. Let's get into it. >> Judge, two other quick matters. I I note that Mr. Reyes is um as he has in the past wearing meta glasses. Um, obviously there was a request to uh film the proceedings. There is an individual filming in court now, but Mr. Reyes is not allowed to film. Um, I don't know. I know he's indicated in the past they're prescription glasses. I don't know if he has another pair of prescription glasses that he can bring to court or two uh just simply assure the court that he won't be uh recording using those kind of glasses. Judge, last time when uh Mr. states attorney who wasn't here uh was in this court with these same glasses. They are prescription glasses and I did not record that proceeding and I do not plan on recording this one as I'm not permitted to. Um it seems there is a camera here as well. So it's unnecessary for me to record. I don't have the court's permission to record. I won't be recording. These are just prescription lenses. Uh same as last time I wore them and no videos were taken judge. Thank you. The court will just note that the court did receive the request uh from a uh media provider that was verified through the Connecticut judicial branch and uh there was no objection raised by either party to the uh recording of the these proceedings. The court did grant that request subject to limitations that are within the practice book and we'll accept Mr. Ray's representations with respect to the classes. >> Thank you, Judge. It might be may I be heard on a procedural matter? Certainly. Judge, I ask that the witness be witnesses be sequestered under general statute section 54-85A. I have a specific reason. Judge, the state will call multiple officers who are on the scene together and their written accounts of the central fact in this case already differ. Um I would ask that the witnesses be sequestered. >> I have no objection as long as it works both ways. We can proceed. Thank you. St. Paul's Deon Bard. Do you solemnly swear solely sincerely affirm the case may be that the evidence you shall give regarding this case will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth beyond penalty of >> I swear. >> Please state your name, title, and place of employment. >> Sergeant Deon Dart Grown Police Department. Thank you. Sir, thank you. >> Mad. >> Thank you. Good morning. By who you employed? >> The GR Town Police Department. >> What's your current rank? >> Patrol sergeant. >> How long have you been a sergeant with GR? >> Uh, two years. >> And prior to that, how long have you been a police officer with GR Police Department? >> Approximately 9 and a half years. >> Um, could you tell the court your background and training after high school as it relates to law enforcement? >> Yep. I attended 6 months at the Connecticut Post Police Academy along with various other trainings after the fact while on the job. >> Okay. Um I want to draw your attention to July 11th of 2025 at approximately uh 10 of 5 that evening. Um did you receive a dispatch to go to Well, first of all, were you working that day? >> Yes, I was. >> And uh were you in full uniform? >> Yes, I was. >> And um were you driving a Groen Mars police vehicle? >> Yes, I was. Do you have occasion to be dispatched to a location within the uh town of Gr? >> Yes. >> What was that location? >> 46 Pendleton Farm Lane. >> And what was the nature of the um dispatch? >> It was a trespassing complaint regarding a offduty police officer and a person. >> Could [clears throat] you tell the court what you observed when you first arrived on scene? Um, as soon as I arrived on scene, I observed a LED box truck playing the video on loop along. >> What was the nature of the video, if you recall? >> Um, it was calling for the firing of Sergeant Brian. >> Okay. >> And, um, do you know who lived at that address you were dispatched to? >> Um, I did not know at the time. >> Okay. Did you later learn who lived there? >> Yes. Sergeant Brian. Okay. Is he now retired? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, and what else did you observe when you first arrived? >> U, there were two individuals. Um, one including the defendant standing in front of that box truck >> and made recordies pointed to the defending trunk already. Very very important. >> And, uh, there was a third individual um, wearing just socks standing at the end of the driveway. >> And did you were you able to identify that person? >> Uh, yes. That was Brian P. >> All right. And the other individual um, that you saw along with Mr. Rey is in the in the uh circle that did you see him in court earlier today? >> Um I did not. >> Okay. Um do you recall his name? >> Glober. >> Okay. >> What did you do next? >> Uh I proceeded to go and speak with Brian Jade. >> Okay. And um [snorts] to speak with him, where did you proceed? >> Uh initially I met with him. I made contact with him at the top of the driveway. Um, >> when you say top, do you mean the >> closest to the road? >> Okay. >> Um, and then I requested that we move down further down the driveway just to separate the two parties cuz tensions were still high at that time. >> Okay. And, um, are you are you generally familiar with that area? And did you become familiar with the nature of the the driveway and and the houses there? >> Yes. >> We're going to show you what's been marked exhibit one for identification. ask if you recognize that. >> Yes, I do. >> What do you recognize it to be, gentlemen? >> Um, this is the property of Brian Fehee along with the end of the culde-sac at Pendleton Farm Lake. >> Okay. Um, I'm going to ask you use the uh green pointer that's there in front of you. Just if you hit it twice, the button, be careful, it's very blinding. Um could you point out for the court where um the circle is in that where the driveway proceeds and where it splits? >> Yep. >> This is the end of the culde-sac. Brian Behey's driveway comes down. It breaks at the easement and then this is his property. >> Okay. And there's another shared uh property over the same driveway. >> Yes, there is. Um, is that a fair and and behind it there appears to be uh sorry, let me just find it. There appears to be a road that proceeds sort of uh in the in the lower leftand corner of that. Do you know what road that is? >> Yes, that's Interstate 95. Okay. >> Is the only entrance to those properties up that driveway? >> Yes. Is this a fair and accurate representation of the way those properties looked back on July 11th of 2025 when you first arrived? >> Yes. >> I would offer to judgement, sir. >> I'll judge it. Now, as you proceeded up Mr. Fe's driveway, did you note anything as you walked up? Um, yes. I noticed uh several signs on the rad. >> Okay. Now, which side of the driveway were those? On >> the left hand side, one car driveway. Um, there was smoke grass on either side. >> Okay. And, um, the signs uh, you noted, do you recall? Uh, well, withdrawing. Were they readily visible as you walked down the driveway? >> Yes. >> All right. And, um, could you describe the signage that you saw? Um, the first sign that I saw was a private drive, no turnaround sign. Um, then I observed a second sign that was a no trespassing sign. And then there was a third sign that was identical to the first sign that was a private drive, no turnaround sign. >> And with respect to the no trespassing sign, was that up on anything or was it down? >> No, it was down on the ground. >> Okay. And um, let me step forward for a moment. At some point, did you know that one of your fellow patrol officers moved that sign out of the bushes that you saw in? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, when you were on the driveway, however, had it been moved yet? >> No. >> All right. And could you observe at least [snorts] the signage on the ground? >> Yes. off to the right hand side of the driveway still at the end of the culdeac. Okay. Would the box truck sort of be to your left in this photograph? I understand. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. And is that the beginning of the driveway to um the FY residents as well as the other residents that shares that drive? >> Yes, it is. >> Is that a fair act representation where that area looked on 5:00 p.m. on July 11, 2025? Yes. >> And there appears to be another mailbox on the other side of that driveway. >> That is correct. >> All right. So, two mailboxes at the end of that driveway. >> Yes. >> I would offer uh three and four exhibits states exhibit uh five for identification. Ask if you recognize that. >> I do. >> What do you recognize that? >> Uh this is the top of the driveway looking directly down it from the courtside. >> Okay. And um in the lower part of that photograph, can you still see the sidewalk that goes across that driveway? >> Yes, I can. >> Um can you make note of anything else in that photograph as you see it here? >> Uh yes, the first sign that I identified before is the private drive sign. >> Okay. And um is that a fair act representation the way the driveway looks from the culdeac at approximately 5:00 p.m. on July 11th of 2025? >> Yes. >> I would offer support. >> No judgment states exhibit. >> Showing you states for identification. [snorts] Ask if you recognize that. >> Yes, I did. >> Where do you recognize that to be? >> That's the private road sign. dead end, no turn around >> except the one that was previously shown in the prior code. >> Correct. That's the first sign. >> Okay. And is that a fair accurate representation the way that sign looked as you walked down the driveway that day on July 11, 2025, approximately 5 p.m.? >> Yes. Now, there also appears to be a dirt type area just there appears to be some someone walking on the driveway in front of the sign. Correct? >> Yes. >> All right. Next to that, there's sort of a dirtish area there. Do you recognize what area that is? >> Yes. >> What do you recognize that to be? >> That's the area where I saw the second sign on the road. >> Okay. The the >> the no trespassing sign. >> And is that a fair and accurate representation of way that whole area looked on July 11? >> Yes. >> I would offer as a full exemption. Six states exhibit seven for identification. Do you recognize what that face? >> Yes. >> Um, and when you first saw it as you were walking up the driveway, >> could you see that from the driveway? >> I could. >> And could you see it in the brush? >> Yes, I could. >> Is that a fair accurate representation based on where officer is pointing as to where you saw that sign that day on July 11th, 2025? >> Yes. And um the trees in the center the shorter trees in the center of the photograph. Um is that where the driveway splits? [clears throat] >> Let me point to an area for you and then sorry I say shorter trees. It's hard to see but that area right there. >> Yes. The the driveway splits just before those trees. >> Okay. And the dirt patch area that you referred to previously where you had seen that no trespassing sign in the bushes. Is that uh depicted in this photograph in the lower left hand corner? >> Yes. >> And is that a fair act representation the way that driveway um existed on July 11, 2025 when you walked up the driveway with um Mr. F? >> Yes. offers a full exhibit. Station 69 10 for identification. You recognize what that shows? >> Yes. >> What do you recognize at the show? >> Uh this is the Eastman um closer up in the same driveway at 46. >> Okay. And um [snorts] is there appear to be Well, first of all, do you see the residence in that photograph? >> Yes, I do. Is it the one to the left or the right? >> The one to the right. All >> right. And do you see another sign on the driveway posted again? >> Yes, I do. >> All right. [clears throat] And do you recall what that sign said as well? >> Yep. That sign to the left is identical to the first sign. It's a uh the private road to turn around. >> Is that fair representation the way that area looked on July 11, 2025 when you first uh got on scene walking up the driveway? >> Yes. >> I would offer no judgment. Stacy exhibit 13 for identification. Do you recognize that? >> Yes. >> What do you recognize that be? >> Uh this is a photo looking out from the porch of the residence. >> And uh the there appears to be an officer and a couple civilians standing there. >> Yes. >> Are those uh um >> Yes. >> to the end of the call or to the call center? >> Yes. >> As you saw on July 11, 2025. Yes. No objection. Now, did you at any point did you have occasion to speak with the defendant at any point that day? >> I did. >> Okay. And what was the nature of your interaction with? >> Uh my interaction with him was explaining um that he was going to be placed under arrest. Okay. And um among those charges, was there a criminal trespass charge? >> Yes. >> And um were those signs that you saw, particularly the private road signs, were they uh readily visible to anyone walking up that driveway? >> Yes. >> And again, from your point, walking up the driveway without any investigation side to side, were you able to see the other sign in the bushes? >> Yes. Nothing further. >> Good morning, Sergeant. Good morning. You testified that when you walked in the driveway with FY, Mr. Feain, uh, you saw a no trespassing sign in the brush. >> Yes. >> Was it underneath? Was it were there um leaves on top of it or vines on top of it at any point? >> No. >> So it was completely face up with nothing covering it whatsoever at all? >> On top of it? No. >> Okay. Were there vines growing around it? >> Around it? Yes. >> You testified [clears throat] it's in the brush, right? >> It was in the brush. Okay. >> And you saw it when you walked up the driveway on your own? >> Yes. Did you tell anyone else about the no trespassing sign? >> No. >> So, you saw the no trespassing sign. You didn't you didn't discuss it with any officers? >> I did not. >> The other sergeant on scene and >> um are you talking before it was moved or >> I'm saying when you first saw it with Mr. FY, when you first arrived on the scene, did you discuss the fact that you had noticed a no trespassing sign with any of the officers or sergeants on your day? >> Yes. >> Who? Sergeant. >> Sergeant. >> What did you tell him? >> Uh, I explained that there were several [clears throat] signs posted along the driveway. Did you say that it was down and it wasn't posted? >> Yes, that one was not clearly posted. We were more so discussing the other signage, >> right? You had a conversation. Do you recall a conversation on that same drive with Officer Romani? >> Uh, I had a conversation with him while I was taking pictures. Yes. >> And you don't recall a conversation before that? >> No. >> So, you've indicated that there were private road signs. You said private drive, private road signs though, correct? >> Correct. Are those vehicle signs? I don't understand the question. Are those signs meant for vehicles? Based on your experience and your training as a police officer, would a private road dead end, no turn around, be for a pedestrian or for a vehicle? Uh, I would say that's up for interpretation, but I would say both. >> Both. [clears throat and cough] So, no turn around to you would mean you couldn't turn around if you were pedestrian. Then >> I would say that the sign has two halves, too. So, the private road would apply to both. The no turn would apply to public vehicles. >> And does a private road sign indicate not to enter? >> That's legal conclusion. best for me. >> I'm just asking based on his training. He he deals with criminal trespassing cases all the time. I'm asking what he thinks and you can judge whether the weight of it. I'm asking what he thinks based on his police officer. He deals with criminal trespassing crime. He's seen a lot of signs before is asking what what is it what his thoughts are on private roads. >> His thoughts don't matter. The question is, is that signage enough under the statute? And did the defendant knowingly pass that sign uh and go? That's what this case is about in trespass 3. So, what the officer's opinion is of that doesn't matter. What the court's opinion ultimately is the issue. court understands that uh what's ultimately being solicited is whether or not this witness believes that the sign is legally submission to um put a pedestrian on notice if they can't go down the driveway which is a legal issue that's a contest here. So the court's going to sustain the objection you indicated that the no trespass that it was a narrow that the uh driveway was a narrow driveway correct? Yes. >> So, it makes sense that these signs would say dead end, no turn around for vehicles to not turn around. Correct. >> Well, objection. >> I'm just trying to get an idea of what the dead end no turnaround sign is. It's it's clearly it's clearly it's he that's what he's indicating that he saw. I just want to get his thoughts on what happened, what what he the narrow driveway and how he's trying to run. >> Again, with all due respect to the officer, his thoughts on that don't matter. He testified as a fact when they said on the the private road that had no turn around signs. What color were they? >> Uh, yellow and black. >> Yellow and black. Did they have any scratches on them or anything like that? >> Uh, yes. Yes, it appears so. >> Were they on the left side or the right side of the driveway? >> The left side. >> The left side of the driveway. And you had testified earlier that the beginning of the driveway is an easement. >> Um the the middle of the driveway is an ement. Yes. >> Yes. Up to the >> up to the middle of the driveway. Correct. >> Yes. >> And you indicated that the driveway you saw some evidence that they provided that the driveway splits at that easement to two different directions. Correct. Yes. >> To do two different residences, correct? >> Yes. >> Do you know if that other residence is other properties owned by Sergeant Brian Bay, former Sergeant Brian B? >> Uh, it is not. >> It is not. And the signs were on the left side of the driveway. >> Yes. >> Were there any signs on the right side? >> No. >> You said you explained to me the arrest. What did you explain to me about my arrest? He testified that he had conversation with you about my arrest. >> So, it's hearsay and it's irrelevant. >> What's the relevance of what he told you about your arrest? Question. Did you order officer to remove the sign from the brush as you testify? >> I did not. You did not. Through your training experience as a sergeant and supervisor with the police department, are your officers trained to touch evidence once they find it? >> Uh, they are not trained to touch it, but things happen in the midst of a scene, >> right? Question. So, they're not trained they're trained not to touch evidence, correct? That's what they're trained not to do. Um, it depends >> in this in a trespassing case if [clears throat] obviously it needs to be clearly posted. Correct. You said it wasn't clearly posted. >> Objection. Can you rephrase the question? >> Sure. You testified earlier that the sign wasn't clearly posted. The no trespassing private property sign. Correct. >> Yes. In a situation for investigating a criminal trespass as a supervisor, should an officer in your department move a no trespassing sign that had fallen into the brush as you stated? >> Go either way, I think. >> Sure. What would be the what would go either way? That's your answer. What would be the reason why somebody would ruin the trespassing sign? Why an officer would? Because if he wasn't [clears throat] aware that I was already aware of it, he may have wanted to bring it to my attention and not forget it. So he may have moved it, but that's something that you would have to ask him forever. So you already that's why you didn't have any conversation with Roberts about the sign. So he moved it. How How far did you move it away from your estimation? How far did he move it away from where it originally was at to where it was when you took a picture of it? >> I would say approximately 4 or 5 ft. >> 4 or 5 ft. So you're saying it's it's it's standard policy in the police department when you want to show supervisor something a piece of evidence, you move it first. Is that where you're justifying your? >> No. >> So you don't move it. >> Well, that's not policy. It's not policy. >> No further questions. After you saw the signs and you left Brian Faby on the driveway with other officers, um did you proceed somewhere to try to memorialize what you had seen on the driveway? >> Yes, I returned to the cold set. Uh I had a conversation with Sergeant D'Angelo and then I proceeded to my police cruiser to retrieve my camera. >> Okay. And did you begin taking pictures? >> Yes. >> And by the time you got back to the no trespass sign, had Officer Ransky moved it by that point? Yes. >> Unbeknownst that you were taking photographs. >> Yes. >> All right. And um the photograph that is in evidence, I'm not sure which number it is, but uh the area that officer Ransky's pointing to that he indicates he removed the sign from, is that consistent with where you saw the signage um when you were walking up the driveway? >> Yes. Again, do solemnly swear solemnly secure the [clears throat] case may be that the evidence you shall give regarding this case will be the true double truth and nothing but penalty of please state your name, title and place of employment. Officer Jenny, patrol officer Gron Point or Grount PD 68 point road. >> Good morning officer. How are you? >> Good. How are you? >> Good. Um, what's your application? patrol officer >> with what time? >> Grant time. >> How long have you been a patrol officer? >> About six years. >> And uh could you tell the court your background and training as it relates to law enforcement? >> I went to the police academy and then training and then amongst other training. >> Okay. Now I want to draw your attention to July 11, 2025, approximately 10:05 that evening. Uh did you were you working that day? >> Yes. >> And were you in full uniform? >> Yes. Were you uh driving a graten marked police vehicle? >> Yes. Do >> you have occasion to respond to a uh dispatch call at that time? >> Yes. >> And where where did that direct you? What was the nature of the call? >> The address was 46 m in my sort of disturbance involving an individual trespassing involved. Now, when you arrived, uh what did you see? I saw other patrol cruisers as well as a large truck and then I saw a man standing in the driveway. That's who I met first. >> Okay. And did you later come to know the identity of that person? >> Yes. >> And who was that? >> Brian. >> I'm going to show you some more station uh and ask you if you recognize that. >> Yes. >> What do you recognize that? That is the billboard truck as well in the culdesac of friendly. >> Do you see the driveway that you met uh retired Sergeant Fagy or then Sergeant uh at >> Yes. >> All right. And because you just pointed out with the laser pointer I don't mind pointing to an area between two cruisers between three cruisers, excuse me, on the center left of the photograph. Is that accurate? >> Yes. Right. >> And record. Now, what did you do um with Ser where did you move with Sergeant Fatty as you encountered him? >> We walked down his driveway. >> Okay. >> Towards his house away from the culdeac. >> Yes. >> As you walked down the driveway, did you make note of anything as you were walking? >> There were multiple signs posted on the left side of the driveway. I'm going to show you what's in March states exist at 5. See if you recognize what that photo shows. >> Yes. >> What do you recognize at the show? >> The signs posted on the left side of the driveway. >> Okay. And um does that depict the start of the driveway from the culdeac in the bottom part of that photograph? >> Yes. >> And um showing you states exhibit six. Do you recognize what that shows? >> Yes. What is that? >> The private road then turn around signs on the left side of the red line. >> Okay. As you walked up with um Sergeant Pey, did you make note of any uh no trespassing signs in the bushes? >> No. >> Okay. As you continued up the driveway, was there another sign identical to the private road dead end no turnaround sign? >> Yes. >> I'm going to show you what's been marked states exhibit 10. See if you recognize that. >> Yes. >> What do you recognize that to be? >> The sign on the left side of the driveway as well as the [snorts] Sergeant Brian Batty's residence. >> Okay. And the area that is um Oh, actually, are you depicted in that photograph? >> Yes. >> Okay. Is that the area you spoke to uh Brian B at? >> Yes. >> Were the signs of readily visible as you traveled up the driveway? Yes. >> Showing you now states exhibit 11. You recognize that as well? >> Yes. >> Where do you recognize that to be? >> The private road signs that were on the left side. >> And where was the second sign located? >> Further up on the left. >> Would [snorts] you say that it was further up on the Was it on the eastment or was it on the other homeowner's property? >> No, it was on There was the one on the left side of the driveway. There was the one at the end. I think that's the first one you're referring to. >> No, I'm referring to the second sign, officer. The second sign in relation to the properties. >> Would that be on Ryan Fe's property or his neighbor's property? >> If she knows, >> I'm not sure which sign it's referring to. >> I'm going to So, you saw two signs? >> Yes. >> You saw two exhibits with two signs on them. Correct. >> Yes. The >> first one by the a little bit further up from the mailbox, correct? The second one you looked at the sign. Was it It was on the left side. Correct. >> Yes. >> Was it on the side of Brian Fehey's property or was it on the side of his neighbor's property? >> I don't know the lines. >> Well, no. No, I didn't ask you about lines. I asked you what side of the driveway was the sign on. Was it on the side? You know, it splits into two, correct? >> Yes. >> The right side is Brian Ba's property. The left side is his neighbor's property, correct? To >> my knowledge, he it was on the left side like we said. And to my knowledge, I was informed he owned the entire driveway. So, I would say yes, Brian's property. >> He owns the entire driveway past where it splits. >> Yes, he is 17. >> Okay. And on the right side where it goes to his house, you didn't see any signs, did you? >> No. So the only signs you saw were on the left side of the driveway, the shared driveway. Correct. >> Yes. >> One. >> Well, objection. She testified that she testified it was Brian Favy's driveway. She didn't say share driveway testified to. But so all on he owns the entire driveway according to you. Correct officer? >> Yes. >> Where do you So if you saw the survey, you said you testified survey. Where does where does his driveway end? What survey >> you mentioned you saw that you gave a surve that you saw a survey, did you? You didn't say that. >> Okay. How do you know that it's all his driveway? >> That's what I was advised on. >> By [clears throat] far. >> Okay. So, where do did he tell you where his driveway ended? >> I couldn't see them. I was told the entire driveway was his. >> When you Let me Let me clarify. When you say driveway, there's one driveway, right? And it splits into two other driveways. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Are you saying that Brian Finny owns the both driveways that split at the middle? >> I don't know where it ends. >> You don't know where it ends. But you're not saying that he owns both of those. >> I don't know where it ends. I have nothing. >> Okay. So, he testified. There's just want to clarify. No signs on the right side of that driveway. I share otherwise. No signs on the right side of the driveway. Only on the left side of the driveway. >> Where the driveways intersect. Officer, is the sign past the intersection of the driveways? >> I don't remember. >> You just told you saw a picture of it. >> Yes, but it's from far away. If I can see a closer up picture, I'd be able to recall. >> Okay, we'll get to that. No further questions, Mr. Actually, one question one more question. When you were conducting, you said you were trained at the police department. How what the police academy? Correct. >> Yes. >> How many months ago training at the police academy? >> 6 months. >> 6 months. That's it. Um when you were talking to Brian Fay, did you say to him that you that he did have that he handled the situation right? Something to that effect. >> Objection. Relevance. Kirstson. >> The the relevance. I'm asking her what she said. >> Kirstson. I'm asking what she said and and she wrote her report. I mean I'll call her later. Withdraw withdraw. Um may I just have forgetting about the second sign for a moment. The first sign you saw. Did you have to pass that to get to any property up above? No. >> Do you solemnly swear solemnly sincerely affirms occasionally that the evidence you shall give regarding this case will be the truth. The whole truth and nothing but the truth. We got our penalty paper. >> Yes. >> Please state your name, title, and place. >> Sergeant Tyler D'Angelo. D E A N G E L O. Brown Police. Sir, >> thank you. >> Good morning. Good morning. Um, what's your current rank? >> Uh, currently a patrol sergeant on the Union Police Department. >> And Brown employed you? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. And how long you been a sergeant? >> I've been sergeant for 3 years now. And um how long you've been uh an officer brought just shy 10 years. And um could you tell the court your background and training as it relates to law enforcement? >> Yes. Uh I was hired as a police officer in 2016. I attended the post police academy. I train uh attended training throughout my career as a now um I want to draw your attention to July 11, 2025 at approximately 105 that evening. Do you have occasion? And uh first of all, were you working that day? >> Yes, I was. >> And uh full uniform? >> Yes. >> Uh marks patrol off the car? >> Yes, sir. All right. And you have occasion to respond to a dispatch? >> I did. >> What was the nature of the dispatch? Uh I responded to 46, fountain lane for the report of disturbance. It was between a Connecticut state trooper and a reported for first amendment auditor. The Connecticut State Trooper reported he had a firearm and that the first amendment officer auditor was trespassing on the property. Do you see uh the person you refer to as the law uh first amendment auditor in court today [clears throat] and did you encounter him on scene that night? Could you point him out for the court and indicate who he is? He's identified Mr. Ray. >> Um upon arrival on scene, what did you do? Uh when I first arrived on scene, I believe I was the last officer. Um as a supervisor, I kind of just observed the scene, what was going on. Um, I observed the defendant uh conversing with officer Roman and another officer. I don't recall who that officer was. Um, and then I went up to the defendant to introduce myself. Okay. And did you have a conversation with the defendant? >> I did. All right. And um did he explain in general his his uh point of view of what had occurred that that [clears throat] mission party first question is just whether yes we haven't you spoken to essentially what you had spoken I'm sure is coming next but to the extent that you're going to project well >> um did he talk about that sorry Did he talk about the nature of what had occurred from his viewpoint? >> Yes, sir. >> All right. And what did he indicate? >> Uh, he indicated that he was um I can't remember verbatim, but a journalist and he was there to investigate um something to do with over time with the Connecticut State Trooper. Um that he had gone up to the residence. Uh he believed that the state trooper was just going to close the door on his face. Um that was not the case and he said that the state trooper retrieved the firearm and escorted him off property. Okay. Um, did he indicate whether or not there had been a um I'm going to speak to him? >> Yes. >> All right. And did he indicate what he Oh, you said he thought he was just going to slam the door in his face. Um, did he indicate anything else about um that interaction in terms of what he thought was going to happen? Yes. Uh, he indicated that he didn't like the Connecticut State Trooper and that the Connecticut State Trooper didn't like him. um that you believed he was just going to close the door and they were going to go in for several weeks. >> All right. Did he indicate anything about understanding uh how the trip if you recall? >> I don't. Okay. Um at some point in the culdeac did uh Mr. Reyes show you a portion of a video that was recorded of the incident? Yes, sir. >> And um did he fast forward past the part where he went up the driveway? >> Yes. the first round observed with him at the front. >> Okay. And um is there any other way in in your estimation to get to Brian Peggy's property except by walking up that driveway? >> No, sir. Do you recall whether or not Mr. Ray has indicated he walked up the driveway? >> I do not. We show you what's been march exhibit one. [snorts] Ask you if you recognize what that shows. I do. All right. [clears throat] What do you recognize that to be? >> Uh that is 46 and I believe 48 Hamilton form lane. Um and the driveway is outlined uh from the culde-sac to the right hand side of the screen. Okay. Now um at some point did you have occasion to uh walk up the driveway as well? >> I did. >> And did you make note of any signage that was present uh to deter people? Yes. All right. What What did you know? >> Uh, so I noted at least two signs. I believe there's three total judgment said to deter people if he testify. I thought this was I thought that was up for you to to decide whether sign is to deter or not. >> I I'll rephrase. Um, did you notice any sign signage on the driveway? I did. All right. What did you know? I noticed at least uh two signs. I believe there was three total. Uh, two of the signs, I can't recall verbatim, but it said something to the effect of project drive, no turnaround. Uh, they were yellow in color. There was two of those. And the third sign was white in color. Uh, I believe it had red accents and said private property, no trespassing, something to that aspect or maybe I can't. I'm going to show you states exhibit six. See if that refresh your recollection about what the two signs that you saw uh look like this. And um that first sign I'm showing you states exhibit five or I should say withdrawn states exhibit 6. Is that accurate as to what the signage say? That is correct. And showing you states exhibit 5. Um do you recognize that viewpoint of that? >> I do. That is from the culdeac of Pendleton Farm Lane and the sidewalk is observed on the lower end of the screen. >> All right. And that first sign, is that the sign depicted um or one of the signs depicted in states exhibit 6? >> Yes, sir. >> All right. And were they identical in nature? >> Yes, sir. That first one is visible even from the cul. Correct. Right. And then um the the private property sign, the no trespassing sign you saw, did you come to learn that by the time you saw it, it had been moved from its original location? That's correct. What? So you never saw it in it? Did you see it in person at all? Ever? >> I did. >> And but by the time you saw it, was it in its original location or was it moved? >> It was moved, I believe, by officer and it was photographed by Sergeant. >> So you never saw it in the original location where it stood, where it died. the private road, that sign that you just took a look at, dead end, no turnaround, do you believe that to be a traffic sign objection? Again, the ultimate issue for the court is, is that posted or or reasonably allowed under the jury instructions for criminal trespass as to whether someone be put on notice that they shouldn't go up that driveway? That's ultimately a legal issue. His opinion as to uh what that sign is or isn't does not matter. >> He's asking about his at the time his frame of mind and what he thought the sign was. [snorts] You're asking if he believed it to be a traffic sign. >> Yeah. >> So what is his belief with respect to whether it's a traffic sign? Why is that relevant? physically. >> Oh, because he's the one that he's part of. He's a police officer and he he arrested me based on signage apparently and his belief on when he's conducting his investigation is important to why I was even arrested. Ultimately, he's the him and the other officers are the ones that decided to charge me with criminal trespassing, felony voyerism, and breach of the peace. And I'm just right here on criminal trespass, but just trying to get his his his friend of mine at the time pointing focus on the officer's frame of mind. Whether there's probable cause, we're beyond that. Now, judge, this is beyond a reasonable doubt for the court as a factf finder to decide. Um the officer's uh subjective belief as to what it was, whether it constitute probable cause is uh irrelevant to the trial. The courts your arguments to the extent you wish to make them in the future that the signage is insufficient as a matter of law. The court agrees that the witness's belief with respect to the legal ramifications of the sign is it's not relevant to sustainable. When you spoke about when you were talking about the signs and your officers, the no trespassing sign, you said you testified that officer Romansky believe is the one that told you about the no trespassing sign in the brush. >> I believe it was officer, Sergeant Darvi. >> Do you know who told you first about the sign? >> I do not. >> Did you indicate him? Did you indicate to him that it wasn't clearly posted? >> To officer, excuse me. Did you indicate to officer Mansky that it wasn't that it hasn't been conspicuously posted? >> Um, I believe there was a conversation about the manner in which it was posted when he located it. The exact words that officer told me, I don't recall exactly how he said it was. He said it was moved prior to me getting there and where it was. Obviously, I I can't have the same observations with him, but he was reporting that it was posted uh face up in the weeds. So, you don't recall ever saying that the sign was that that tro shop is a trespassing sign needs to be conspicuously close to you? >> I may or may not have said that at this point. I I don't recall. >> Did you have any other conversation as a supervising sergeant with any of your officers regarding So, you said you had conversations. You said you had conversations with the officers and possibly Sergeant Bard about the no trespassing private property. >> Yes. Yes. >> Did you have any conversations with the officers about the private road that had no turnaround time? >> I'm sure it came up. I can't remember exactly if we did or we didn't. But we we did have discussions about the signage. >> Was that sign like was it was it important to your investigation? >> Which sign exactly? >> The private road, excuse me, I'm sorry. The private road sign. So, I think the private road sign was definitely part of our investigation whether or not it specifically said private property, no trespassing. Uh, that did come up in conversation. It didn't necessarily affect their property in that sense. >> Okay. But when you're speaking to your officers and you're conducting your investigation, yes, you mainly spoke about a private property. No, uh, private no trespassing private property sign. Objection here, sir. The nature of the objection here. Sure. Was asking what his what what generally did he have conversation the main conversation about the no trespass. >> So the question was whether the conversation was generally with respect to no trespassing sign as opposed to the um private road sign question. I'll ask that question. Can you repeat the question? >> Sure. Was your conversations with your officers primarily regarding the no trespassing, no private private property sign as opposed to the private road sign? >> I wouldn't say that was the primary focus of our conversation. It came up in conversation. Yes, >> it came up in [clears throat] conversation. >> We did have a conversation about the signs of state. >> And you had your act I forgot to ask you this. You had a body camera on that day. >> Yes, sir. >> And it was activated the entire time. It >> was activated the entire time. Um when we have um officer officer conferences by policy and procedure we are allowed to mute those conversations which was done when I spoke to the Utah Sergeant Governor. >> Why do you mute those conversations? >> Because by policy and procedure we don't need to have them uh activated uh unmuted if you will unless we are interacting with a member of the public. >> I understand that that's your policy but I'm asking why would you why would you mute your conversation with another president? the state policy, the state one. So, he already answered your question that he muted it because that's the policy they have. You're asking him why they have that policy. >> No, I'm asking why did he muted that particularly? He has other conversations that he doesn't mute it. So, why why particularly that conversation would he mute it? Maybe I misunderstood because I understood the testimony to be that when there's officer offer conversations muted, but let me rephrase the question. Do you have conversations with officers one-on-one where your body camera isn't muted? >> Yes. >> So, why did you mute it when you were talking with the dog? >> Uh, it depends on the conversations. Um, and we also we actually got new body cameras recently where the the actual um act of muting it is different and it's hard to figure out. So, to answer your question on that, it it really isn't relevant. It depends on the situation, what we're dealing with. Um there's no underlying matter to it. Sometimes it's it's just the officer to officer conversation um where we have discussions regarding cases generally. >> Is there anything in your policy that tells you when to mute body cameras? >> No. >> So your testimony here is today you have the discretion to mute your body camera whenever you want while you're talking to another officer and a member of the public. Isn't there correct? So if it's just an officer to officer conference it's called by policy we are allowed to mute that conversation via the body. And why did you mute it that day? We were having a discussion about the case in general and there was no particular rhyme or reason. I' I've done it many times. Uh sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. There's no necessarily particular reason to to muting it. We during that I have no problem telling you. We were were discussing the the case at hand and we were discussing uh the charges that we're going to move forward with. >> The lawyer had been in charge and all those charges. Yes, sir. >> Did you speak to anybody else that day? Any other law enforcement officers that weren't on the scene? >> I did. >> Who did you speak to? uh notified uh the captain uh in further chain of command as we are supposed to uh by procedure and also the state's attorney. I I don't know if this is statewide. I'm assuming that it is, but when a uh police officer is suspected of potentially committing a crime, uh we have a memorandum that's sitting in my office. I also have it in my control cruiser state's attorney's office is to be contacted uh to notify them of the incident which was done through the chain of command. >> And just for the record, you didn't speak to this state attorney's office, right? >> No, I didn't speak to any state's attorney. That was done through the chain of command. Uh I'm not aware if there was one here. To my understanding, it was 31, which is our judicial district in Rock. Did you speak to the police chief that day? I did. Is that typical? >> Through chain of command. Yes. >> And you testified you had a conversation with me when you arrived on scene. Correct. >> That's correct. And you testified that I was there I told you I was there to as a journalist investigating a story on police overtime. Something to >> Yes. Did you ever bring up any signage to me? Objection here. It's still a conversation with the defendant. Defendant can't offer his own statements or any conversations he had as an admission of a party opponent cuz he's not the party opponent. You have to stay connected with me. So any conversations uh would be yours. [snorts] >> Are you asking if he told you about the sign or he brought a sign to you? Yeah, I'm I'm asking the question was did he talk to me about the sign? >> Okay. >> Any signs? >> And why is that not your s? >> Well, I mean, he he testified as to what I said about that I'm a journalist. He testified to at length about our conversation. So, under the rules of evidence, it's not hearsay when one party's offering it and it's the other party's statement. But this officer is not a party to the case. So your introduction of what he said to you or what you said to him doesn't meet that rule. Does it mean any other exceptions here? No. >> Do you remember what else we talked about? Sergeant objection here. >> I I I guess if it's a yes or no, I apologize. I'll withdraw it if it's a yes or no answer. Does he remember anything else he talked about? If it's substantive, then I object. So we will make the question whether you remember anything else that was discussed. >> Uh sir I don't remember the entirety of our conversation but we did have a conversation for a couple minutes >> and you watched the video >> from your cell phone. Yes. >> And you said that it's the video started while I was at the front door. >> In the vicinity of the front door? Yes. >> And I and you watched the video when when what was the end of the video that you watched? I believe the end of the video was um when Brian FD and you were at the end of the sidewalk. I believe that that was the end of the video. I know it wasn't an entirety of the video from start to finish. Um it was a portion of the video, but I believe that was the end that I split there. Yes, sir. >> No further questions. Thank you. Thank you. If you recall from watching the video that uh the defendant just referenced, um as you said it started at the house and then ends up down the driveway. All right. As they're moving back down the driveway, are you able to see that first sign uh that um private road sign um near them as they back up? Yes. Are are you able to see at least a whitish sign from well withdrawing? Where is the view of the video that you saw from? If if one was Let's Let's try to do this. If one's standing on the driveway, would the person videotaping be on the left hand side of the driveway facing Brian Fayy's house on the right hand side? >> If you're going up or down, >> if you're going up, let's just say, would it be on the right hand side or the left hand side? The >> signage. No, the the person videotaped I would say could be [clears throat] the driveway was so narrow that I don't believe it would particularly be way left or way right? Let me let me try to rephrase it. If as they moved back down the driveway, what positions were the PE Mr. Rays and Mr. Batty in? They were on a chest to chest. >> Okay. And and if you're looking at the video, would the culde-sac be to your left or to your right as you're looking at the two individuals on the driveway? From my observations and recollection, I believe it was to the rear. It potentially was candid a little bit. Okay. But let me let me try to get at this. Was it on the side where the signage was or on the other side of the driveway? Would the video taper be? Uh the the video was pointed at the the two parties backing down the driveway and you could see the wood line on the left and you could see the wood line on the right. Okay. >> So I wouldn't say it was particularly tanted either way by a significant distance, but you could see both sides from what I Okay. As they move back down the driveway towards the culp, could you see a private road sign on the other side of the driveway? >> Yes. The same yellow sign right there. And could you see white signage in the bushes from the observation of the video if you recall? Not that I Okay, thank you. One question. >> Um, so when you're watching the video, you you testified that you could see both sides of the driveway, correct? >> I believe so. Yes. >> And you said you were you were able to see while watching the video the private road, dead end, no turnaround sign, correct? >> From your cell phone? Yes, sir. Did you see the no trespassing sign in that video? Not that I recall. Questions? >> No. Thank you. Thank you. >> There's an edit with an inject discussing awareness of no trespassing signs and other things. >> Where was that edit in terms of the driveway? If you recall, >> it was just beyond the first uh posted private drive sign as well as uh the trespass sign that was in the brush. >> That part was edited out of the first parts. Go ahead, continue. >> Uh there's another head um shortly after that inject where he approaches the front of the home. Um shortly there after there's a confrontation um after Mr. Peggy becomes aware of what's going on, just essentially escorts him off the property. Okay. And as they back down the driveway, were you able to see the the signage that had been edited out going up the driveway? >> Yes. >> In particular, were you able to see a private road sign? >> Yes. >> All right. And were you also able to see uh some white signage in in the brush right beyond that sign? >> And that's before any police arrived on scene. Correct. >> Correct. And um you indicated that on his way up during that edit there's a voice over effectively that one needs to be aware of no trespassing signs when doing something like this. >> Yes. >> I have no further questions. >> Um so on the day question I um did you you watched you said you watched the video. >> Yes. >> Um posted on my YouTube channel. >> Yes. You watch it in its entirety? >> I believe so. That's sort of what I was asking at that moment in time. So, okay. And when you said that you saw a sign in the video, you testified that you saw a white sign in the video. >> Were you able to clearly see the sign and read it for what it and were you able to clearly see the sign and read the contents of the sign? >> In watching the video form, >> you can't. >> You can't. What What could you see that you determined it was the sign? You can see the outline and color um which later upon part of my review encompassed boxes provided by video. I was able to determine a case on a location from where that sign that specific sign that you weren't there that day but I was not the sign you are you familiar with the investigation as far as the pictures of the sign after it was moved by officer? >> Um yes. the sign you saw in the video that I guess would you say it's like a part of a sign or did you see the entire sign? >> You can see an outline of the object and that is what >> that is white. Yeah, but you [clears throat] can't make out the text. >> No text. >> And the the location of the object, the white object is was in in the bushes in the brush. >> Yeah. So, a different location than the photograph that was taken by Sergeant Vicard in this investigation. >> Assuming you're referring to the photograph where the sign had already been removed and it was photographed outside of the brush. Yes. >> Do you know if there's any photographs that the Bron Police Department took of the sign where it lay when you see it in the video that I published? To >> my knowledge, there's not. Do you know why that wouldn't why there isn't? >> I wasn't there and I didn't take part in >> You're a lieutenant. So, is it is it typical for officers in your department to move evidence after it's been discovered? >> Would you typically >> I want to call it typical but it's said that's not >> well I'm sorry. He said something else after that. I just want the record to be complete. It's not typical, but >> there are there are certain instances when you make remove evidence from it location. >> Why would you do that? >> Maybe to um preserve it in some way or to demonstrate what it what it consists of. Um but you still need the document after the fact that no trespassing and this was a criminal trespass investigation, right, Lieutenant? >> You don't know what you're investigating? Well, yes, it's a criminal trespass investigated. Okay. In Have you ever investigated a criminal trespass before? >> I haven't. So, over 22 years. >> Okay. It's a long time. Um, and in that 22 years, have you investigated criminal trespasses? Have you or any of your officers that you work with ever moved a no trespassing sign? >> I wouldn't know that. >> So, you can't think of any instance where that's happened? I mean, you're asking me to recall 22 years of lieutenant and say whether or not something happened that that's difficult for me to do if it's possible. Okay. >> Well, why would it do you know why? As if you're a lieutenant, you're you're a high ranking officer in the Bronx Police Department. Is there any specific reason that you can think of in a criminal trespass investigation why a sign would be removed before taking a picture of it? Me personally, no, I can't. No further question. the video you watched um on YouTube that was posted by Mr. Reyes. Um where is the cameraman located as they back down the driveway towards the culde-sac? Um and you get towards the signage, where is the cameraman located in general as it relates to the driveway? >> Sort of behind you, right? >> Okay. To to the right shoulder of the of the driveway. So from that viewpoint, can you see that first private road sign as they back down the driveway? Yes. Right. Where in relation, how far away was the white sign that you saw in relation to that private driveway sign or private road sign? Like if you were to estimate from where the the that first sign was to where up the driveway the white sign that you saw was on the ground, how far away from the first sign was that sign? >> I mean difficult to ascertain based on the video and pace of them moving and angle but if we are more >> you think it's that far >> maybe. I'm not really sure. >> Okay. You don't know what you say here. >> It's yes it's difficult to try to estimate that. Okay, please. >> Thank you. No further. >> Please raise your right hand. You solemnly swearly sincerely affirm as the case may be that the evidence you shall give regarding this case will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I'll be given. >> Yes. >> Please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh Teen Glover, uh 111 College Road, apartment 58. >> Judge, just one point of reference to the court. Mr. Glover was arrested as part of this too. He uh recently was granted accelerating rehabilitation, but technically uh I would think still has a fifth amendment right. I just uh informed the court uh of that. If the court wishes to inquire, I don't think he would invoke that, but I think it's appropriate given the fact that if he fails on AR, he could be prosecuted. All right. >> [clears throat] >> So then uh understanding then based on those representation series that you reision the accelerated rehabilitation program you understand that that's a pre-trial diversionary program but your case is still pending and has not been dismissed as of yet. You understand that? You understand that on the fifth amendment, you have a right to not testify or say anything because everything that you say in court is being recorded and potentially used against you in any future court case or any pending court case, including your pending criminal case. >> Yes. And notwithstanding that fact, you're uh you can erase your fifth amendment right or ask for an opportunity to speak with counsel if you wish. You understand that as well? >> Yes. >> Do you have any questions about your fifth amendment right? Um, no. Very good. Thank you. >> Thank you, Judge. >> Can you please say your name for the record? >> Lower. >> Were you with me on the afternoon of July 11th, 2025? >> Yes. >> Where did we go? >> Uh, Sergeant Ryan. >> Were you recording? >> Excuse me. What was the purpose of going to Mr. Fatty's residence? >> Why is that relevance? Sir, >> um it I think it becomes relevant to the knowing aspect of the statute whether I intend but I knew I wasn't licensed or privileged to be [clears throat] on the property. your purpose in going there as understood by this witness you believe demonstrates whether you had known whether you could be there or not. >> Well, yeah, because the other officers have stated that, you know, I told them that they I was there for journalistic purposes and I think the the reason why I was there is relevant to whether I knew I was licensed or privileged to be there. >> Well, I disagree with that. Secondly, the only way he would know whether there is a hearsay statement of the defendant. If the defendant wishes to testify later, he can. Um, but uh it it is one irrelevant to whether or not a criminal trespass why they were there. Uh unless they're some sort of Amazon driver package. It's irrelevant as to why uh they were there. What matters is whether they pass a sign if your honor finds that sign sufficient under the law. Uh and therefore trust. But it's not just a sign. It's the statute is the sign and then knowingly separately. It's knowingly uh that I knew that I was unlicensed or privileged to be there. You believe that this testimony will support that you were either licensed or privileged to be there? I think it would support if I knew I was on license there. I understand based on the evidence already in to the that there was some claim regarding journalistic purposes. I don't want to go very far down that road. >> Okay. to the extent that your claim is that your purpose uh demonstrated some belief that you had about license or um privilege to be on property will allow a limited amount of uh range for that. >> Were you recording, Mr. Glover? >> Yes. [clears throat] >> What were you recording with? >> Uh an iPhone. >> What color was the iPhone? I don't recall. >> Was it my iPhone or your iPhone? >> Your iPhone. >> Did you record continuously or clips? >> Continuously. >> Mr. Glover, did you when you arrived at the residence, did you take note of any signage that was present? >> Yes. >> What sign? >> It was a a two-way early time. like letting you know there was it was it was a two-way road sign. Do you remember? >> Did the sign say no trespassing? >> No. >> Did you What color was the sign? Do you recall? >> No. And did you ever see a no trespassing sign? No. Did you see a private property sign? >> No. Did you see any signs that would indicate to you that you couldn't enter the property? No. Um, do you recall making a video with you you made a lot of videos with Mr. Reyes after court dates out in the parking lot, correct? >> No. >> Okay. Do you recall being on a video um labeled Do you watch the videos that Mr. Reyes post? Okay. Do you recall being on a video with Mr. Rez um after the last court date when you got AR? >> Uh yes. >> Okay. And do you recall um it was it was labeled just got out of court Reyes versus trial update. Do you recall that at all? Um I I didn't watch a video. Okay. But you got on camera with Mr. Reyes, correct? >> Yes. >> And he referred to you as a star witness. You recall that? >> No, I don't recall. >> Okay. If if you were to watch part of that, would that refresh your recollection? >> Yes. >> Okay. And [clears throat] um do you recall as well during that video, Mr. Ry referring to the fact that you saw no trespassing sign, but he didn't see it while you were there? Okay. Um, judge, I'm going to need to let him watch it. I'm not sure if your honor wishes to take a a short recess. I have an edited clip um from the uh full video that is the part I'm talking about. So, you have an opportunity to see that. So, for practical purposes, take a brief recess for all. >> And um it's in it's filmed in the parking lot across the street. >> Yeah. >> And you were there for that, right? Yeah. >> You were present when he said what he said on that video. >> No, >> you were present. >> Yeah. >> In the parking lot next to him when he said cuz you jump on camera right after that, right? >> Yes, I was present. >> Okay. So, right after the right after the video clip ends, you jump on camera with Mr. Reyes uh talking about being a star witness, right? >> Well, he said that. You didn't say that. Objection. How is that? It goes to bias over. Mr. Reyes says you're a star witness, right? Yes. Okay. And then um I'm going to play the clip for you now as it occurred and you agree that happened, correct? As it's said on there. You may disagree with what it means, but you you agree it says that, right? I'm going to offer judge. Um, is that a true and accurate copy of that? Um, I I I don't you were there for it, right? >> Oh, yes. Okay. He wouldn't know. He wouldn't know if it's true or accurate. He didn't record the video. I'm going to lack that lack of foundation. He didn't record it if he didn't upload it. So my understanding is that Stacy stood emit a video that was recorded in the parking lot witness present and the question was whether invariably inaccurately depicts what it purports to show which is what's being said on camera and the objection is that that's insufficient foundation video. It it's it's admissions of the defendant recorded off of his uh YouTube video that he posted. Um, I I would say it speaks for a subject. >> So why would he ask me if I'm the one that posted it? If I'm the one that the video, how could he be authenticated as it being an actual video? He didn't take it. >> He was present for he was present for the whole entire video. Was he didn't he didn't testify? He present for the entire video. He didn't [snorts] testify to making the video. >> How long was the video? >> Yeah. 3 seconds. 4 seconds. He testified he was present. at this part when he just testified to that, >> right? So, it'll be state 15 it'll come up on the screen. It is team Glover is my strong witness because he was there. He knows exactly what happened. He was recording the entire time. He knows that the no trespassing sign that they found in the bushes was there. I don't know when it got there, but >> you were present for that. >> Yeah. Correct. >> I wasn't aware though. >> You now claim you weren't aware, but you didn't correct him on camera, right? >> I wasn't listening to him. Like I was I was around him, but I wasn't listening to what he was saying. Like that's something. >> Okay. So your claim now is that you didn't see the no trust sign despite the fact Mr. Ray said he did. That's objection. That's not what the video says. Well, the video say that. Excuse me. The video doesn't say that he saw the sign. The video says that it's me saying that he knew the sign. He knows the sign was in the bushes. That's not saying that he saw the sign. That's what I Well, I understand that the question now is is are is it your testimony that So, he's not asking about what was said on the video or what it meant and you'll have a further opportunity to ask questions as well. So, you have the question I'm sorry again. Thank you. Is it is it your testimony now that you did not see this? >> Can Can you say that? >> Sure. Is it your testimony now that you did never saw at the no trespassing center? >> I never saw it. >> Okay. Did you see the U private driveway sign? Private road sign? >> No. >> You never saw that sign either? >> No. >> You're claiming you saw some sign that said two-way street or something like that? >> There there was a there was a sign, but it wasn't uh indicating no trespassing or private road. >> That's not my question. Oh, it didn't say private road. [snorts] >> There wasn't a sign that said private private uh You said private road, right? Okay. Do you recognize what that shows? States exhibit five, Mr. Glover. >> I see the sign on. >> Okay. Do you recognize that to be the driveway you went up and passed with Mr. Reyes? >> Yes. >> Okay. And you indicated it didn't say private road. Show me states exhibit six. You see the indicated it says private road, sir. >> Yes. So, it did say private road. Yes. >> And you saw that that day? >> I don't recall. >> Okay. You you mentioned on direct that you saw some sign that said two-way street. >> Yeah, there was some sign. Yeah. >> Okay. >> I just don't know what the sign. Do >> you have any pictures of that? >> No. >> Okay. No further questions. Mr. Glover, >> on July 11th, 2025, when you arrived at Mr. B residence. Did you see any signs that would indicate to you that you couldn't go onto the property? >> No. >> Objection relative. >> You said no. >> No. >> Did you watch the body camera footage after? >> Objection. Beyond the scope. Right. So, there was no cross-examination regarding the body. I'm just going to expert statement. The two-way sign that you said you saw, could that be the sign? Is that is that the sign that the state's attorney showed you? No. So, just to make it clear, you did not see any no trespassing sign or any private property sign while you were there on July 11th, 2025. Thank you. Despite what Mr. Reyes said in the video after court say I did not see the question. >> Despite what Mr. Reyes said on the video while you were present after court on June on June 9th of this year. Correct. >> Uh can you rest that question? >> Sure. You didn't see any sign despite the fact what Mr. Reyes said on video with you present after court on June 9th of this year. Correct. nothing more question. >> Mr. Glover, did you you you heard what was said in that in that video that the state entered in as evidence, correct? >> Yes. >> Did I say that you saw the sign that day? >> Objection. Video speaks for itself. And so you're asking this witness what the video what you say in the video. >> Yeah, I'm I'm asking him if I because the prosecutor is saying that I said something I didn't say. We can play the video again. It's important if you believe that the question incorrectly um states what you were saying the video you responded you were the first responding officer on the scene that day correct on July 11th 2025. >> Yes. You wrote a police report on that on that day? >> Yes. >> Everything in that was within your personal knowledge? >> Yes. >> Did you have your body warn camera operating? >> Yes. >> Officer Mensky, you're the officer that located the sign, correct? >> Objection. Just clarity on. Officer Mensy, you're the officer that located the no trespassing private property sign, correct? >> Yes. Where was it when you look when when you found it? It was on the ground near the tree. Would you say it was in the brush? >> Yeah. Yes. Was it conspicuously posted? >> Objection. Was it posted? >> No. >> It was facing the sky. Correct. >> Yes. >> Do you recall how many times you walked down the driveway when you first arrived or during the Excuse me. Which one? Do you recall how many times you walked up and down Mr. Fag's driveway that day on July 11, 2025? >> No. Was it more than once? >> Yes. More than twice? Um, if I showed you a video, your body warn camera would remind you how many times you walked up and down the driveway. >> Yes. Multiple times though, right? When you first walked down the driveway, did you notice the no trespassing sign? The private property no trespassing sign? >> No. >> You knew this was a trespassing incident, correct? Uh, yes. >> So, were you looking for a no trespassing sign? >> Uh, no. I when I got there, >> yes. No. >> You're a trained police officer, correct? >> Yes. >> What kind of training did you get? >> Uh, 6 months of the academy. Is observation part of that training? Yeah. Your report indicates that you observed it while walking backwards. >> That's the improper way to put up parts of the report. There's been no impeachment yet. There's been [clears throat] nothing just reading from the document that's not evidence and nor should it be an evidence of this one. I apologize for that. So I understand basis of your question is from the report but you're asking this witness about what he did and saw that question so it's not referred to. >> Thank you. >> When did you see the sign walking back towards the property from the property the no trespassing sign? Um, when I was walking back up back up or back up to the uh driveway after speeding with Mr. Fade, I'll be confused. Were you walking towards the road or towards the property? Towards the road. Towards the road. Were you looking for it when you were walking towards the road? Yes. Why? I believe uh Mr. Fay's wife had pointed me in the direction. um saying that there is a sign up there. >> A sign you didn't see when you first walked up. >> No, or a subsequent time. >> I I'm sorry. Say that. >> Or any of the subsequent or the subsequent time that you walked up? >> I'm not sure what you're asking. >> So you you walked up the driveway, you testified you walked up the driveway at least two times, right? Okay. So, both times you walked up the driveway, you didn't see the sign. Correct. I recall when I walked up the driveway, one of the times that I was told that the sign was there and I located the sign. You walked up the driveway at least two times. In those two times, did you see the sign? >> I must have. So your testimony now is that you saw it while you were walking towards the house? >> No, I I saw the sign when I was walking towards you, brother, >> right? But you you testified that you walked up the driveway at least two times. Correct. >> Yes. Okay. So, I'm asking you the two times you walked up the driveway towards the residence, did you notice the sign? No trespassing. It's not private property. I don't know. specifically what you're asking. Um, let me I guess I'll just keep asking the same question. If you walked up the driveway two times, you testified that you saw the no trespassing sign, private property sign when you were walking back towards the road. I'm asking you in the two times you walked up the driveway towards Mr. Fee's residence, you did it, you testified you did it at least two times. I'm asking you in those two times at least, did you ever see the sign? No. Oh, thank you. About how far away was it from the driveway? [snorts] The private I'm so sorry. The private property sign, no trespassing that you found, how far away was it from the driveway? 10 ftish. 10 ft. How big was the sign? about the size of a piece of paper. You think the sign Did you Did you do you think the sign was clearly visible? >> Whether it was clearly visible from the road to this officer's whether it was clearly visible to this officer or not, his opinion on that is is irrelevant. like he put in his report that it's clearly visible upon. >> Well, I think I would So then the question is whether or not the no trespassing sign was clearly visible from from the My question is it was clearly visible from the driver. From the driver. >> Yes. Well, yet you didn't see it two times that you passed it. Correct. >> I was directed kind of in the area or to look in a certain area. Um, and upon further, you know, review, I could see it clearly. >> So, your testimony is that it was clearly visible. >> Objection. This is direct. He doesn't get to cross, >> but he's an average witness. He's a he's a police officer. So that doesn't make him adverse. He called him. There's no indication of any hostility and and he's asking questions. He needs to follow the rules of evidence and ask direct questions, not leave. [snorts] >> All right. Can you rephrase your question, sir? >> Judge, I would like the witness to be on the Connecticut Code of Evidence 6-8 to permit examination by any questions. This witness is a sworn officer at the Broadentown Police Department. He was the first officer on the scene. He arrested me. He's the author of the supplemental report on which prosecution relies. He's a witness identified with the adverse party and I ask that uh you examine them as there's been absolutely no showing that he's adverse or hostile just because he'd like to cross him. That's not how this works. [snorts] I think the court doesn't have a sufficient basis at this point to consider an adverse um which isn't to say the questions can't be direct as opposed to suggestive answer you proceed that way. Did you so your testimony so you can't so you didn't see the sign until you got closer? Was the sign recently affixed to a tree? How could [snorts] you know that? >> I mean, judge sworn in his sworn police report. He says in his own words that he admitted he signed and he sworn to it. He says the sign appears to be the sign appeared to be originally affixed to a nearby tree that has since fallen and was lying face up on the ground. >> Well, originally fixed and recently a fixed are two different things. Again, he's reading from a document, not an evidence. and for argument purposes, not for questioning. But the question that was asked, was it recently a fixed? There's no way an officer could give that opinion. Uh I mean, if he wants to ask him if he uh if he knows if it was recently a fixed, he can say yes or no. But to ask him that question, um it's different than what he just read in the report, which is it was originally a fixed. Those are two different words to it goes on today. The sun was not covered with leaves or grass and it appeared that it had fallen recently. So sir, why don't you ask from a foundational perspective? I mean you can ask him what he knows, what he saw, why he uh how he knows what he knows without asking him to speculate about it. Did the sign fall recently? which you actually cause unless there's some basis upon which he should know that he wrote in his report that it fell recently. So he hasn't testified today that it fell recently the court permitting you to refer to the report in terms of your argument. The report's not evidence and it is his out of court statement um that's not being offered for substantive impeachment purposes. So you can ask him questions about what he knows and what he saw that day and his experience. Um but citing to the court in terms of what he wrote in his report, it's not an evidentiary basis about why it's under you. You said you were trained at the police academy. Were you Were you trained on evidence handling? >> I don't recall. Did you do anything to manipulate the sign, the no trespassing private property sign from where you originally located it? >> Yes. is when I located I picked up the sign and I placed it uh where I placed it like right next to the road or right next to the uh driveway. How close how how far did you move it? >> Uh I I can't speak to exact feet. I said it was probably 10 ft off the road. So maybe five or six feet or driveway. >> Did you place it in the Did you place it at the driveway? I I believe I placed it right next to the driveway. Why did you do that? >> Um um Mr. Ky's wife pointed me in the direction said there's a no trespassing sign there. Um, so I picked up the sign, put it down, let my sergeant know that, hey, there's a sign. So, there is a sign here. I understand, officer, but you need to answer the question. I asked you, why did you move the sign? I know that you moved it. Court knows that you moved it. Why did you do it? Why did you move the sign? No, cuz I did. I I saw it on the brush. I picked it up, put it down. >> And you later, did you take any of the pictures with the sign? >> Oh, like in my evidence, like not >> I don't I don't think No, no, I didn't. >> Did you take a picture with the sign? >> Uh, what do you mean with the sign? Did you take a picture with the sign? A picture with the sign? I don't recall taking any pictures on scene. >> Did you see any yoga signs that day? >> Yes. >> What were they private road signs? Did they say anything else? >> I don't recall. I just remember them being tell. Do you recall if they said any thing that said do not enter, keep out? >> I just remember they said private road. How many signs were there? Were there? No. At least two. Do you remember what side of the driveway they were on? Both of the signs or one of the sign? Whatever side of the driveway they were on. >> The left side. Walking in. How far from the private road sign would you best did you find the no trespassing sign? [snorts] >> Well, may I just ask for clarification? There there was an indication that there were multiple private road signs by this witness. So, I I'm just trying to clarify which sign we're talking about in terms of distance for those trespass. I'll clarify the first sign. How far was it in your estimation from the no trespassing sign? >> Estimate 15 to 20 ft. >> Did you [snorts] discuss this item with anyone? >> That should be a yes or no answer, please judge. Otherwise, don't. [snorts] >> Yes. What we need to discuss over >> um well Mr. F's wife >> and then I think I think I uh Sergeant >> were you the first officer on scene first law enforcement officer on scene to find a sign? Well, objection. He knows. I think he knows. Are you the first officer on the scene finding? >> I I don't know. That's going to take us to our 126. [clears throat] >> All right. That to be true. I just wanted to bring that that on the record to point attention because somebody had brought that out to me that he's uh moving his hands a lot and when he's answering questions and he's looking towards him. So just wanted to put that on the record that that's not acceptable that I understand it's not acceptable. It didn't happen. And to even be accused of that, I'd like to talk to the person who said I did. Didn't happen. Judge, I'm an officer of the court. Uh this court I've appeared before this court before. It simply did not happen. I might have done a better job if I was actually doing that, but I I didn't do that, judge. It didn't happen. So, to even suggest that uh without Mr. Reyes uh observing something that he thinks I did wrong, it it's it's um just simply disingenuous. court will uh note as well that he has not observed anything in kind of signaling or or other kind of uh suggested conduct. So thank you judge. You already testified that you had seen the no trespass you had not seen the no trespassing sign when you walked up initially walked up the driveway correct? >> Yes. Did you see the no trespassing sign when you were leaving the residence? >> I don't recall. [clears throat and cough] >> Are you aware that one of your colleagues, Officer Ransky, moved the sign from its original place? >> Yes. >> And yet you still didn't see it? >> I just don't remember. >> Do you have any personal relationships with the babies? >> No. You don't know any of the babies? >> I I know of them now, but not prior. >> So, you didn't go to school with >> Oh, not a professional like a personal relation. I did. We worked in the same building. Yes. >> So, you knew him? >> Yes. Sorry. >> I'm sorry. Who's him? >> Who did you know? >> The son. >> What's his name? >> Colin. >> How long did you know him? I worked in the school for about a year and a half and I didn't work there. We never had much conversation. >> Did you know Sergeant J before this incident? >> No. >> Sorry. >> And you said you testified that you did 6 months in the police academy. Correct. >> Yes. >> Did you learn how to write reports in the police academy? >> Yes. Were you taught to be objective or subjective in your reports? >> I don't know specifically what I was taught. >> Do you know the definition of objective? >> Do you know the definition of subjective? >> Yes. >> I don't think we were taught either or just document everything you see. >> Did you tell Mr. FY that he while you were conducting your investigation, did you tell Mr. Fehee that he thought he handled it perfectly? >> Objection to hear Sir. So the objection is that it is hearsay. It's an out of court statement on the truth of the matter. It's provided to your body. It's provided. So the objection isn't relevance. It's why it is or is not hearsay. Okay. Did you write the report? Did you Did you get a statement from uh former Sergeant Fay? >> Yes. >> Did you write it yourself or did he write it? >> I wrote it. >> Is that typical? >> Yes. >> Did you make any suggestions to Mr. Fee on how to write the report? Objection re >> I not sure I understand what what's the offer that whether this officer gave any advice to Sergeant B regarding writing a report. What does that have to do with the trespass claim in this case? It just shows I as investigation judge. I don't see the connection. Did you ask me? [snorts] I don't know if I answered how you asked this. I answer you answered this already. How many private road dead end no turnaround signs were there on the property? >> I saw two. >> You saw two. >> And they were on the left side of the property. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> No further questions. Thank you. >> No, thank you. Thank you. >> Officer released from subpoena, sir. >> Yes. >> Thank you, officer. >> Thank you. Judge defense calls. Kimberly F. Okay. Do solemnly swear solemnly sincerely affirm the case may be that the evidence you shall give regarding this case will be the truth of the truth and nothing but the truth. I hope you got our penalty per >> please state your name and your address for the record. >> May I ask for just town of residence? I mean it's sort of public knowledge anyways but just correct town res. >> My name's Kimberly FY and probably miss it. Mrs. Fiji, were you at your residence on July 11, 2025? >> Yes. >> When this incident began, where were you? In >> in the kitchen. >> You were not outside? >> No. >> Did you see me walk up the driveway? >> No. >> Did you see me at the front door? Nothing. [snorts] >> Do you know if any of the trespassing signs were clearly posted? >> I know we had no trespassing sign. >> All right. So, my question is on July 11, 2025 at approximately 400 p.m. when the incident took place, do you know if a no trespassing private property sign was posted? Clearly, >> all I know is that there was there had been a a sign posted. >> When was the last time you saw it posted? >> I couldn't tell you. I drive in and out of that driveway. I I don't know. >> The private road dead end, no turnaround signs. Who's Who owns those signs? >> Who owns them? >> Who purchased them? >> Our neighbor purchased them. >> Your neighbor purchased them? >> Yeah. They asked us permission to put them up. >> Okay. Do you know if I went to your neighbor's house that day? >> No, I don't know if you did. >> Why did you said that they asked you for they asked you for permission? >> Yes. >> Did they give you a reason why? >> Why they asked us for for permission? >> Why they wanted to put the signs up? Well, we've lived there for 17 years and in that time period, we've both purchased no trespassing signs for that area. >> I'm asking I'm sorry. I'm asking particularly not about the no trespassing sign. I'm asking about the private road dead end. No turnaround sign. >> Do I know why they No, >> you have no idea. >> How long do you know how long they've been there? Those signs >> the private room. >> I don't know. >> Are visitors allowed at your house, Mrs. B? >> Visitors. We have people over our house. Yes. >> What about visitors that you didn't invite? >> Objection. Relevance. >> The issue here is whether he trespass. >> Judge, I'm just trying to get to the understanding of cuz honestly this whole trial feels bizarre to me. I'm trying to understand if I'm trying to get to the point of if everyday people knock on her door regardless of what sign they're supposed to that it's a normal occurrence for doesn't matter if it's a normal occurrence or not. Maybe they're trespassing too but it doesn't matter. >> So why is that relevance sir? Um, I think it's relevant because it shows that those signs weren't intended to stop anybody from coming up the driveway. So, your question is whether or not they have uninvited visitors that come up on a regular basis. [snorts] >> All right, you can answer that, man. >> The answer to that is no. Has since it's No. What has like any salesman ever come to your door? >> No, actually. >> Never. Did you ever communicate to me that there was a sign there? >> I don't think I've ever communicated to you. >> Did you tell anybody else that you had posted signs that day? >> Objection. hearsay and there's no legal requirement to tell anyone you have posted signs. That would be bizarre. I'm just asking if she told maybe 911 or the officers that that there was poster or not. >> That wasn't the question. I would withdraw the objection as to whether she told 911. That's the question. >> Okay. I'll rephrase the question. Did you Did you tell any officers or 911, law enforcement officers or 911 that the sign that the no trespassing [snorts] sign was posted? >> Yes, I told 911. >> But you don't know if it was or not. >> Well, no, because I was in my house and it always has been posted. So, when I called them, I just told them what I've always known. >> Always has been posted. But you don't know for how long? my the note trespassing on the tree that no trespassing site that's >> oh that's been there years I mean we that's been there I don't know the exact date but that's goes back years that that's been posted there >> like more than 5 years >> yes >> more than 10 years >> I don't know if it's more than 10 years >> how did you affix it to the did you affix did you affix the sign to the did you post the sign >> personally no >> do you recall how it was posted. >> No. >> So, you don't know if it was posted on a tree as >> it's on a tree? No, it's on a tree. >> Okay. [snorts] >> And you purchased that, not your neighbor. Sorry if you answered that. I >> My husband purchased it. I I personally didn't purchase it. We We purchased it. Yes. >> Do you have any other no trespassing signs on your property? >> No. >> That's the only one that's on the property? May I inquire then or now? Just a time frame. That's all. >> Well, okay. Then at the date of this incident, were there more than one no trespassing private property signs? >> We had the sign on the tree and the two signs that blank the driveway, >> but those signs didn't say private property, no trespassing. >> No, they don't say that. What about as your property sits today? [clears throat] Do you have additional no trespassing signs? >> Why is that relevant concern? Because if it wasn't properly posted on the day, maybe they put it up maybe they put up more to to make sure that it was properly posted. So the court's going to sustain that objection. [snorts] Do you have any other signage besides a no trespassing private property sign and the two do you have any other signage besides the private road dead end no turnaround and the no trespassing private property sign? >> No, there's then or now. >> No, then. >> Then we had three signs. One on the tree, two that went on the side of the driveway. >> And the two that were on the side of the driveway were purchased by your neighbor. Well, they had to ask our permission because it's our property, >> right? But they they purchased them. They're the owners of those signs. >> I mean, they purchased them. Yes. >> Which means they own it, right? I guess. Yeah. No further questions for Mrs. I just get some judges. >> [snorts] [clears throat] >> Good afternoon, Mr. >> Good afternoon. >> Our states exhibit one up on the big screen. Let me just see if it's focused. Maybe it's not. >> Do you recognize what that shows? Yes. >> What do you recognize that to show? >> My house. >> Okay. And does it also show your neighbor's house? >> It does. >> Does it show the shared driveway um or the Oh, the the the driveway um that leads from the circle up to your house and the neighbor's house. >> It does. >> Right. Um who's who owns that driveway? Uh the cement portion of the driveway. >> Everything that's paved we >> Okay. And uh and then an easement is granted to >> uh the neighbors to use your driveway. >> Yes. >> Where those signs were posted. Let me do this in in sequence. Showing you states exhibit five. First of all, you recognize that sign that's shown there? >> Yes. >> All right. And showing you states exhibit six. That sign is as a closeup of the previous sign. Yes. >> Okay. And that is on your property. >> Yes. >> All right. The fake property. >> Yes. >> All right. And the easement that of using the driveway is granted by legal document to the neighbor, but otherwise that driveway is yours. >> Yes. Now, continuing down the driveway, if you know, um, approximately how many feet give or take, was the tree that the no trespassing sign was posted on from this sign? >> Oh gosh. [snorts] Um, I'm guessing I'm uh less than 10, I would think. >> Okay. There appears to be a bare spot in states exhibit six where there's someone walking. Do you see that? >> Yes. >> Is that approximately the location where the tree was? >> Yes. >> With the no trespassing sign? >> Yes. >> That close to the private road sign? Yes. >> Showing you now uh states exhibit 10. >> Do you recognize that part of the driveway? >> Yes. >> All right. And who owns that part of the driveway? >> We do. [snorts] >> So where that sign is by your own testimony, you don't own it. I'd have to get my law. But yes, that is the corner of our the end of our that's the corner of the end of our driveway or the end of our property in that corner. >> The paved road, the paved driveway. That's what you said earlier. >> No, I did. I said that. >> So therefore, it was P. My question is the sign is clearly passed, right? >> It is. >> So you don't know for sure without you said you said we need to look at survey, right? You wouldn't you wouldn't know. Do you know for sure if that if that property where that sign is uh located? Is that your property? Can you say you can say that for sure? >> Yes, I I can say that for sure. >> Why didn't you put any signs on the right side of the traffic? >> Objection. You set an agreement to put the signs up. I'm just asking if she wanted to put if if she why she didn't want to put up more signs to indicate to people that are going to her house. It's not relevant to any legal issues in this case. We're drawn. >> So in fact, you do own past the paper, right? Right. >> Slightly past. Yes. >> Do you have any? >> No. Not as I say. Yeah. Right now. Do you own the Do you own the property to the left of the driveway? >> Yes. >> You know how far? How many feet? >> No. >> Can't estimate. >> Yeah. It's past where we own more than what's um cut where the grass is cut and then there's brush. We own into the brush. >> But you don't know how far into the brush. Not >> states exhibit 11. Your indication is based on looking at that photograph that that sign is in fact also on your property which contains the grassy area to the left. >> Yes. >> And you said it extends into the brush some some distance. >> Yes. >> Nothing further. Just one last question. You You can't tell me how much more You can't tell this court how much more of that property is yours going vertically. >> Not not be able to say question. Nothing. Thank you. >> Defense would like to call the daughter of Please state your name and town of residence. Thank you. Mr. F, do you who purchased the private road no trespassing signs that are on your driveway? Purchase them. On July 11th, 2025, how many signs were posted on your property? Two. Two signs. I believe so. Yes. And those signs said what? One is a private driveway sign. And I'm 90% sure there was no trespassing sign posted on a tree. 90% sure. Yes, sir. Is it? Let me understand because there was there's three sides. So, is the third side not on your property? Only two are on my property. Only two on your property. Correct. You own the property that's paid. I own the property that's paid. I own the grass on the other side. I own the grass on both sides. But it would be fair to say that you own the property up until when paid it stops. Correct. Do you have any signs on your property to the right of the driveway >> cash in relevance? Yeah. >> Cool. Question. I don't mean to sp the right hand. You told the law did did you tell the law enforcement officers anything about the no trespassing sign? >> Objection or if it's yes or no then I have no objection. But the next question, it's yes or no. You can answer this or it's an I don't know. I apologize. I don't recall. If you looked at your swan statement, would that would that refresh your memory? >> Sure. That approach maybe we can guess. >> Yeah, sure. It's probably better. I I'd ask that extra commentary like I might get hurt if I approach the witness. Stop. I mean that's the whole reason why >> well it's not the reason we're here today. So we'll just keep it to the questions and legal issues we can answer. So, uh, if you could review the document in finish doing so, [snorts] Heat. >> [snorts] >> Don't say anything about that. Thank you. Not that I saw So on July 11, 2025, did you know that the no trespassing private property white sign withdrawal? Who purchased the private property no trespassing sign? I purchased them before. I believe I purchased the one that was in the tree. Don't install it onto the tree. No, my neighbor installed it on the tree. Do you know how he's installed it on a tree? I don't. When was the last time you saw that was posted? This morning when I left the house. What morning? >> Today. You asked me. The last time that I saw it was posted. I saw it this morning. It was posted this morning. Understood. July before July 11th, 2025. When was the last time you saw it posted? came before. >> Did you ever tell me I wasn't invited to your property? Objection here, sir. >> Oh, I would try. >> Did I ever tell you you were not invited to my property? That's correct. You're a convicted felon. You shouldn't be on my property. >> That's not the question. >> You're a convicted felon. You have no right to be on my property. >> Judge, I would ask you to instruct him to answer the question. >> I just answered it. You're a convicted felon. You have no right to be on my property. >> The question is if I can repeat the question and I'm not on trial here. >> You are on trial. >> Thank you. >> But not for that. >> All right. >> So, did you ever tell me that I wasn't invited to your property? No, I don't believe I ever told a convicted felon that you're not allowed on my property. You're a convicted felon. You're not supposed to be on my property. Mr. F, you can control yourself once in your life. >> Objection, judge. This is next question. >> Who's elaborator property? Objection irrelevant to this. >> What are the What do the signs say? I don't know if I answer asked this already. What do What do the signs say? >> I already answered that question. >> The small signs. You answer that question. Did >> in your view does that apply to vehicles? Does what apply to the sign? The private no trespassing sign? No. No. The private road sign. Private road dead end. No turn. It applies to everybody who's not allowed on my property. So what is you are in agreement? You you allowed your neighbor to post those signs, correct? He asked me if he could post them. I said yes. And what was your understanding of why the signs were being published? because we didn't want trespassers on our property. Wouldn't it have been smart to get a no trespassing sign? We did. There's one objection objection smarter or not. >> Wouldn't it have been more clear to have a no trespassing summit? >> There is an offense. question. There is a no trespassing sign posted on the trade. Now then you testify you know 90% sure. What makes you 90% sure? because I'm not 100% sure because I can't say that I saw it that day and you can't say when you saw it at all that I'm 90% sure it was posted on the tree confidence anymore. When was the last time I saw the sign before? Maybe the day before. I don't recall. Do you have any disciplinary history as a law rejection versus the weight of his testimony? It's the same. I've never lied before in a sworn before. No. >> Have you? You're going to ask. You're not asking questions. I would ask questions. Thank you. >> Were you arrested as a result of this incident? Was you arrested? Objections relevant. He was he just testified he's he was arrested at the same day of this incident >> for that incident and I think it goes to the waiver's credibility what he's testifying to today >> as to the legal issue of criminal trespassing has nothing to do >> whether he was arrested that is as an evidentary matter not sufficient to support a claim that it affects is clearly sustaining the objection. Just want to close with this. You You just want I want to make sure I heard you right. You said you have two signs on your property. One of them says no trespassing, private property. The other one says private road, dead end, no turn. Correct. >> May we just get a date reference again? >> On the on the date of July 11, 2025. >> Thank you. >> I have two signs posted on my property. One says no trespassing. Not I. If you say that it says what you said, then okay. But I can't recall exactly what it said. So I thought you said you testified already to what the sign >> I testified. Sign says >> smaller sign says no trespassing. It's posted on the street. Okay. You know you have a yellow sign. >> Correct. What does that sign say? >> I'm not sure. But if you say that it says no turnaround, then I'll agree with you and say that's what it says. >> So you have no idea what that sign says? >> It says no trespass. I I believe it says private property and that's all I need to know. So you believe it says private property again as we said here today private property. You don't know anything else it says on it says private property cuz you didn't purchase it right correct? No further questions. I'm sorry. Did you say something? I didn't hear you. Oh no. He mouth something at you though. You didn't. Okay. Maybe next time. >> Just answer the question. >> There's no question something. There's no question pending. So Reyes has completed his examination. You will have an opportunity to ask questions. So then I understand the court is going to recess this matter until u the state I believe the state's anticipated final witness Mr. Del is available. Is that tomorrow at 2 p.m.? >> Yeah. Uh 2:30ish judge. He is um teaching in Southernington apparently and uh he said it's about an hour and 20 minutes. I will just need a few minutes to talk to him. I haven't sat down with them at all, but I don't anticipate very long, but I would anticipate about 2:30ish, give or take. Okay. So, court's understanding at least for president purposes, but Mr. B's going to testify this case. Mr. Ray is making a wonderful motion to present at that time. Um, and if necessary, that Mr. Ry testify as well. Is that everyone's understanding? >> Yeah, sure. That's our judgment. Is there anything we should take up today before we recess? >> No sir. The court will stand in recess until tomorrow. >> All [clears throat] right. It's recess until tomorrow jur. >> All right, fellow patriots. So, we just finished up day one of the trial. We will have to come back tomorrow for day two where the state will call their last witness and I will be testifying on my behalf. I'm excited to testify because I am innocent. I am going to prove my innocence. So, make sure you subscribe to the channel and have notifications turned on so you do not miss day two of the trial. It is going to be epic. As always, stay safe. God bless. I'll see you in the next one. Long Island Audit. Peace. [music]